COMMENTARY: Deep concerns over Trump’s rash concessions to North Korea

U.S. President Donald Trump meets with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un on June 12 in Singapore. This photo was distributed by the Korean Central News Agency. (Provided by Korea News Service)

Sixty-five years after a cease-fire was agreed to in the Korean War, the leaders of the United States and North Korea have declared their intention to build a new relationship.

The Korean War was the first "hot war" under the Cold War framework established after the end of World War II. It extended the East-West standoff in Europe to a global level and planted the seeds for a confrontational structure between the United States and China.

If an end can be brought to the confrontation that can be considered a remnant of the Cold War, then this summit will be remembered as a historic turning point.

But it is dangerous to leave the future of the Korean Peninsula in the hands of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and U.S. President Donald Trump, whose major swings in what he says and does is far from normal.

Two factors that pushed Trump to agree to meeting with Kim was the mid-term U.S. election scheduled for November and the presidential election two years down the road. Trump never hid his yearning for spectacular results, flushing with excitement when crowds he was addressing began chanting, "Nobel," in apparent reference to the peace prize.

For Kim, the summit was nothing less than a means for the very survival of his nation, evidenced by his strong insistence on guarantees for the continuation of his dictatorial regime.

While Trump was highly animated during the news conference held after his meeting with Kim, the joint statement the two leaders signed was short on specific results.

There were no words that even hinted at ending the Korean War, as Trump suggested he was interested in bringing about before meeting with Kim. Even though no deadline was set for the denuclearization of North Korea, a guarantee of security was extended to Pyongyang. While Trump said during the news conference that he raised the issue of the abduction of Japanese nationals during his meeting with Kim, no reference was made in the joint statement about human rights issues pertaining to North Korea.

The actual terms of the joint statement are far removed from the praise given by Trump toward it, which he praised for being a comprehensive document.

In fact, it can be said that the United States compromised a step or two, especially in comparison with past agreements when rewards were promised only for specific steps toward denuclearization, never budging from the principle of "action for an action."

What is of greatest concern is the time allotted to the two leaders.

In Trump's case, he has just two and a half years remaining in his first presidential term. Kim, on the other hand, is only in his 30s.

The side that does not face time constraints stands at a huge advantage over the side that does. That leads to further concerns that Trump may make further frivolous concessions in a bid to gain quick results simply out of political motives.

On the other hand, John Bolton stands by Trump as his national security adviser. Before joining the Trump administration, the ultra-hardline Bolton advocated taking military action against North Korea. In the past, Bolton has said that he would never allow North Korea to betray the United States, claiming that anyone who was deceived by North Korea twice has only himself to blame.

While the two leaders have now met and shaken hands, minor provocations during future negotiations between lower level officials of the two nations for the denuclearization process could serve as the trigger to destroy the latest agreement.

The leaders of the two nations managed to engineer a historic meeting, but the overriding impression that remains is that the United States and North Korea now stand at a crossroads between peace and war.